What is really AI?
Author
I chose to restart this topic
Feel free to comment.
What I believe is intelligence:
yield for profitability from a certain pov. of thoughts sensed by the subject(thoughts are sensations from inside) .
I started from the a empirical-like pov with thoughts as high sensations.
The rest is God 's Matrix ;)
[Edited by - vallentin on March 20, 2008 1:54:06 PM]
AI is like simulation the humans brain. Things that seem so easy for us to do (find a path or think of a nice move in chess), while in programming we discover it is quite difficult.
Quote:Original post by vallentinHow do you decide that a behavior merits the title of intelligent?
Feel free to comment.
A squirrel stashing nuts away seems pretty clever.
Until we see that he's got no idea where he buried them.
But what if he's a forester, planting oak trees?
Then the squirrel and the oak tree together have a lovely arrangement.
People regularly confuse complex behaviour with intelligence.
Computer systems (e.g. world's telecom network viewed as a single entity) show complex behaviour, but intelligence? No.
Just like the sun is more complex than any number of machines but is it intelligent? No.
(Currently) AI is a misnomer. You just put your ball in the slot and it trickles through your code and you get a correct result. It doesn't think any more than a river thinks and decides the best route down a mountain (both code and river suffer the same problem too, i.e. deciding to go 1000 miles west to the sea rather than going east 1 mile up a hill and into the sea) ;).
And as someone pointed out to me here, (obviously) to code an AI, you need to know exactly what you want it to do, so how do you program true human intelligence when you can't even objectively and completely describe it?
The future might have real AIs but they won't be written in Java... ;)
Computer systems (e.g. world's telecom network viewed as a single entity) show complex behaviour, but intelligence? No.
Just like the sun is more complex than any number of machines but is it intelligent? No.
(Currently) AI is a misnomer. You just put your ball in the slot and it trickles through your code and you get a correct result. It doesn't think any more than a river thinks and decides the best route down a mountain (both code and river suffer the same problem too, i.e. deciding to go 1000 miles west to the sea rather than going east 1 mile up a hill and into the sea) ;).
And as someone pointed out to me here, (obviously) to code an AI, you need to know exactly what you want it to do, so how do you program true human intelligence when you can't even objectively and completely describe it?
The future might have real AIs but they won't be written in Java... ;)
AI is the ability to create a truely random number.
With great AI comes great responsibility.
With great AI comes great responsibility.
AI is a synonym for "magic", when applied to computers.
Corollary to that: if someone understands how an algorithm works, it's not really AI.
That's how the term is used, at least.
Corollary to that: if someone understands how an algorithm works, it's not really AI.
That's how the term is used, at least.
How ironic that intelligence means "to understand," but understanding removes credit for intelligence.
Etymology of the word Intelligence:
Etymology Dictionary: Intelligence
Wiktionary: Intelligence
Dictionary.com: Intelligence
Webster's Dictionary 1913: Intelligence
All of these sources agree that Intelligence comes from 12th century French, derived from Latin, "Intelligere", most often cited as meaning to understand, to comprehend. The Latin word Intelligere is broken out as 'Inter' meaning between, and 'Legere', to gather/collect.
The word "Legend" has the same root, gathering stories/information. Which might explain the use of the word intelligence by spies/military.
Not so common, but interesting, is this Latin word study which lists two possible character strings that are similar to 'legere'. One means "to bring together, gather, collect", while the other means "to send with a commission, send as ambassador, depute, commission, despatch". A nicely orthagonal set.
[Edited by - AngleWyrm on March 23, 2008 5:47:57 PM]
Etymology of the word Intelligence:
Etymology Dictionary: Intelligence
Wiktionary: Intelligence
Dictionary.com: Intelligence
Webster's Dictionary 1913: Intelligence
All of these sources agree that Intelligence comes from 12th century French, derived from Latin, "Intelligere", most often cited as meaning to understand, to comprehend. The Latin word Intelligere is broken out as 'Inter' meaning between, and 'Legere', to gather/collect.
The word "Legend" has the same root, gathering stories/information. Which might explain the use of the word intelligence by spies/military.
Not so common, but interesting, is this Latin word study which lists two possible character strings that are similar to 'legere'. One means "to bring together, gather, collect", while the other means "to send with a commission, send as ambassador, depute, commission, despatch". A nicely orthagonal set.
[Edited by - AngleWyrm on March 23, 2008 5:47:57 PM]
Quote:Original post by Hinkar
People regularly confuse complex behaviour with intelligence.
...and I would respond that people regularly confuse intelligence with complex behaviour!
Quote:Original post by Hinkar
And as someone pointed out to me here, (obviously) to code an AI, you need to know exactly what you want it to do
...then that someone clearly knows very little about AI. The whole area of machine learning deals with the problem of getting a machine to learn what to do when all you know is what you want it to achieve (and sometimes not even that!).
Quote:Original post by Timkin...then that someone clearly knows very little about AI. The whole area of machine learning deals with the problem of getting a machine to learn what to do when all you know is what you want it to achieve (and sometimes not even that!).
Well, i mean if the machine "learns" with neural networks for example, how do you know what it knows? As there's no definition of "intelligence", there's no way to say that this ANN is intelligent (besides Turings absurd little test).
Like the old story of the Neural Network taht was trained to spot tanks in pictures, and it appeared to work with the test pictures, but it didn't work with the new pictures (and they discovered that all the test pics with tanks were slightly darker than the ones without!).
As I said, it's like a river, blind and stupid, and it'll find a solution to a problem, but it'll use the same amount of intelligence as a river finding its way to the sea.
That "machine learning" isn't about "learning" at all. It's about the machine blindly following rules to change its own rules so you get your desired solution... ;) (course if that's your definition of intelligence, then they're intelligent!!! But that IMHO is changing the question to agree with your answer).
;)
This seems to be a lot of semantic flailing around with no purpose. Since there's no standard definition of intelligence, and we all have different opinions on it, there won't be any standard definition of AI either. But that doesn't mean it's not possible to see some distinctions.
As I see it, the main distinction between AI and other computing is that typically computing produces systems to solve problems, whereas AI produces systems that adapt to solve problems. That adaptation often involves rules, implicit or explicit, being stored and manipulated as data, rather than rules stored as code. That's why the term 'soft computing' tends to apply.
You can argue that is 'not intelligence', because you can see all the inner workings and predict it with a high degree of accuracy, but then it's possible that a God or even just a super-intelligent psychologist could do that with a typical human being anyway.
As I see it, the main distinction between AI and other computing is that typically computing produces systems to solve problems, whereas AI produces systems that adapt to solve problems. That adaptation often involves rules, implicit or explicit, being stored and manipulated as data, rather than rules stored as code. That's why the term 'soft computing' tends to apply.
You can argue that is 'not intelligence', because you can see all the inner workings and predict it with a high degree of accuracy, but then it's possible that a God or even just a super-intelligent psychologist could do that with a typical human being anyway.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
